Recent submissions

Comment · 3 years ago
> As far as I can tell, there isn't anyone on the face of the planet trying to build anything like C in order to replace it.

Yeah because it would be a bad idea.

Comment · 3 years ago
Woo is merely the output of 100+ fireside retellings of a theory by someone who tried to construct a metaphysical theory without the woo.
Comment · 3 years ago
Sort of a if-everything-can-happen-it-will-happen scenario. But not what I was talking about.
Comment · 3 years ago
Sure. But concurrent consciousness is too advanced for me to think about. All I know is serial consciousness.

There are all kinds of possibilities, but that barrier of Death is a clear cut-off from my perspective. What’s beyond that? I for sure could imagine annihilation, too. After all I can be knocked unconscious.

Comment · 3 years ago
This only says that consciousness is ever-mutating. Most would agree on that. But most would disagree on the death question: afterlife, another life, or annihilation.
Comment · 3 years ago
I didn’t mention the self or omniscience.
Comment · 3 years ago
I didn’t say that this was good or bad.

I think it’s bad and hope that the Fourth Noble Truth of Buddhism is true.

Comment · 3 years ago
Yeah. Like really, you can’t see eyes well up at dusk? Or hear sniffling?
Comment · 3 years ago
He didn’t even interpret the reason for it. Just that a woman may be disgusted.

You covered some reason for it on the woman’s part. While he (OP) seemed to only be talking about the man’s reason (motivation) to not act like that.

Comment · 3 years ago
Yep, something like that!
Comment · 3 years ago
The mind-body problem sounds too Cartesian. A dualism that is a bit too outdated.

I personally have a weird intuition considering my cultural background: it makes sense to me that my consciousness would be “born” somewhere else when I die. This in contrast to most people of my cultural background, who either believe in annihilism or an ever-lasting afterlife. I don’t really understand why a little more people don’t at least find it philosophically (what’s the word?) plausible, or something.

Comment · 3 years ago
I didn’t intend to brag!: it was only a means to brag about my career success.
Comment · 4 years ago
> Trotsky later claimed that Stalin amassed power as a bureaucratic mediocrity, but it was actually Yakov Sverdlov, assisted by Elena Stasova, who ran the Party machine. Stalin was not a born bureaucrat at all. He was a hard worker utterly dedicated to politics; indeed everything with Stalin was political, but he worked in an eccentric, structureless, unbureaucratic, almost bohemian, style that would not have succeeded in any other government, then or now. Lenin’s trust was won in the bank robberies and intrigues of the early years and, later, on the battlefields of the Civil War: Stalin was hardly in his office before 1920.

Young Stalin

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton